Someone might argue that a nondiscrimination policy does not imply acceptance of practicing homosexuality. The difficulty with that argument is that a nondiscrimination policy places sexual orientation on the same par as race and sex–just another non-essential difference between human beings when it comes to admissions and hiring. In addition, if the policy is consistently applied to faculty as well as to students, it would allow practicing homosexuals to teach at an ostensibly Christian university.

Traditional Christians have long desired to send their children to educational institutions that uphold the orthodox Christian faith. State universities, with their general hostility to Christianity, are not an option for these parents and their children. But the options are increasingly being taken away as “Christian” schools hire faculty who often hide their true positions until they receive tenure. The university does not want a lawsuit on its hands, so it keeps those faculty, who hire more faculty in their own image. Over time, the traditional Christian nature of the college or university evaporates and is replaced by a watered down liberal Christianity that puts tolerance above the teaching of the church. Sadly, that is what has happened at Belmont University. I pray that the same process does not take place at Lipscomb, my alma mater, but as it increases in size and influence, it, too may follow the ways of the secular world. It is one thing to be an at institution which from the start is mainline Protestant–one expects a general liberal bias at those schools (although they will hire the occasional traditional Christian!). But for a school traditionally loyal to the historic Christian faith to deny the basic sexual ethics held by the Christian Church from the beginning is a betrayal of its Christian mission. Belmont is a fine university academically, but potential students for whom it is important to attend a traditional Christian college or university should consider other schools.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

From the early centuries Christians have focused in a rather negative way on sexuality–but not on avarice! Well, only perhaps when the Church was in need of funds. To me the focus now on homosexuality while their country goes about the world destroying other nations seems vapid in the greatest degree. Turn the other cheek has never been a popular Christian saying. Nor has resist not evil. I think people regard these sayings as somehow symbolic and not meant as practical guidelines.
Nor has tolerance of other religions ever been a prominent feature. This is a great shame. I suppose you would agree with me that in this country there are few genuine Christians and many pretend ones.
I don’t know much about Bishop Williamson but I find it interesting that the Jews are after him for making the “outrageous” claim that Jesus was killed by their predecessors. The Zionists among them are happy to be heirs of Abraham but not so sold on being the heirs of the group who demanded the Romans crucify Jesus! Now they want the Pope to do something. If I were the Pope I would probably talk some about the fate of Palestinians as a warm up to discussing the Bishop.

There were liberals teaching in the Religion department not teaching a literal flood when I arrived there in 1980. They had just arrived and have taken leadership roles in between and I can vouche great concern for this.

Orthodox Christians can legitimately disagree about the issue you mention–what is not acceptable is when teachers in Christian colleges deny the Virgin Birth, the Incarnation, the Trinity, and/or the bodily resurrection of Christ. It is also not acceptable for them to support abortion, homosexuality, or “gay” marriage. I hope that my alma mater, David Lipscomb, does not move into heresy, but that is the tendency of academia over time, especially in this age of political correctness.